It provides pertinent information about me and my Wikipedia knowledge, experience, and interests which may address your concerns. DrGvago (talk) 11:38, 27 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the ((admin help)) template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

I have noticed quite a bit of systemic reference/external link spam for the domain planetware.com on a number of pages. On some of them they are using archive.org to mask the spam, others it is directly to their website. Some examples:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamaica#cite_note-kingston-101 <- archive.org link
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palencia <- direct external link "Checklist of notable sights in Palencia with links"
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeds#cite_note-8 <- archive.org link
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piraeus#cite_note-29 <- archive.org link

As you can see when looking at these, the cite reference name takes different forms. "www.planetware.com", "Planet Ware Travel Guide", "Planet Aware" etc. These are just some examples and I believe there are many more per this search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=planetware.com&go=Go&ns0=1 I am not sure how to proceed and I believe this may need admin attention to the accounts that may be involved or a different approach vs me attempting to remove spam, and I am not sure how to find the accounts to report them to the admin spam noticeboard which requests usernames. Also, in the interest of disclosure, please see my user page re: some small potential COI as I do have clients (who don't spam nor are on wiki) in the travel industry. Thank you. DrGvago (talk) 11:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

To add to this, it is not limited to English Wikipedia. Ex:

• https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=planetware.com&go=Go&ns0=1
• https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=planetware.com&go=Go&ns0=1&ns100=1&ns104=1

Thank you. DrGvago (talk) 11:15, 24 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• DrGvago please file a report at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam - srroll down that page a little, and you will see "Click Here to start a new report" . Then give them everything you can on this. Thank you. — Maile (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

• Maile66 thank you for the guidance. DrGvago (talk) 21:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have added you to the settings for that capability, it may be some time before the bot however refreshes its settings (it does not read it every second) so it may not have immediate effect, if it doesn't work after a day or so there is an issue). There are sets of pages that should generate reports automatically (WT:WPSPAM being one, blacklist pages do the same) but with the size of the feed sometimes the bot disconnects and misses edits (it is in my buglist). Thanks for the report! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:34, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forgot to say, the reports go into a queue, and these have lower priority than others. It may sometimes be delayed if there are other domains having priority.

Your userpage makes an interesting read, you say that Wikipedia has low SEO value. I presume due to the use of the nofollow? However, we do see spammers (which is not necessarily the same as SEO) coming here with the complaint that their link is blacklisted and they need the incoming traffic from Wikipedia. Wikipedia being a highly visible page makes it valuable to be linked there so people will find you and visit your site (this goes more extreme for the pay-per-click or pay-per-view websites, where the incoming traffic is more important). --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:42, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As a short summary; wiki links do have some value but you aren't going to rank a page based on wiki links. It takes many more reputable links to do so, and the time and effort it goes to maintain that a link would stay on wiki is a lot. Once the link is removed, as it often is for spam, there is no lasting value. However you do bring up the point that there can be some traffic from wiki as a source but in my experience that has been a very small portion of traffic (if any) for the sites I have been involved with, since the objectives of getting the traffic directly from the search engines is more important, from a pure SEO perspective. So to summarize it, I'd rather a site ranks better than a wiki article and get the traffic from there vs from a wiki article link, especially if it's buried in the references.

Thanks for the COIbot add. I am interested to see how that works. DrGvago (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, DrGvago. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:RareGuru, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 16:02, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, DrGvago. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "RareGuru".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:31, 24 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:13, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Tracy Harpster has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I can't find enough in-depth coverage to show that this person passes WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the ((proposed deletion/dated)) notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing ((proposed deletion/dated)) will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:26, 13 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tracy Harpster is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tracy Harpster until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An article you recently created, Robert Johnson (judge), is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more in-depth coverage about the subject itself, with citations from reliable, independent sources in order to show it meets WP:GNG. It should have at least three. And please remember that interviews, as primary sources, do not count towards GNG.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:59, 26 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, DrGvago. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Robert Johnson (judge), a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add ((NoACEMM)) to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:26, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]